Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Have any of you Obama-lovers ever heard the pharase "It takes money to make money"??
Ok then. you should understand the milliionaires' position. because it takes money to make jobs to make more money.
and If you think for a second that the Fed-Reserve gives a hoot about America and it's ability to stand on it's own you got a nightmare coming. they want us dependent on their printed fiat currency backed by nothing so when it's time to pay up, where does that leave America? all we'll have left is the land and you do realize that people FIGHT over land. right?
Have any of you Obama-lovers ever heard the pharase "It takes money to make money"??
Ok then. you should understand the milliionaires' position. because it takes money to make jobs to make more money.
and If you think for a second that the Fed-Reserve gives a hoot about America and it's ability to stand on it's own you got a nightmare coming. they want us dependent on their printed fiat currency backed by nothing so when it's time to pay up, where does that leave America? all we'll have left is the land and you do realize that people FIGHT over land. right?
This is why people should have a license to listen to AM Radio.
There are so many economic myths in the above post I don't know where to start. I guess the beginning is best.
First, arguing that money left in private hands "allow a bank greater lending capacity;"strength in our private enterprise economy;" and "creates jobs," is undercut by the fact that businesses are sitting on $2 trillion that they aren't investing.
Ahhh, but what you are forgetting is that BO's and the Dem's horrible deluge of "regulations" has stifled the viability of investing. Get rid of that mess and investing will explode!
Quote:
Second, it's more basic than not taxing and letting everyone keep their money. The government needs money to run.
No one said anything about no taxing...it just needs to be cleaned up, all pay and government stop spending!
Quote:
The 2001 and 2003 Bush tax-cuts are the single largest reason the nation has a debt at all. A 2000 CBO projection stated that assuming the Clinton rates remained in effect, the entire debt would be paid by 2006.
Not true...the income from taxes went UP, UP, UP after the Bush tax cuts. I will also reiterate here what I have said before. I bring to your attention that Clinton "gutted" our Military to make his bottom-line spending look better for his ego! When we "FINALLY" decided to go after the terrorists after 9/11 (those terrorists that continually attacked American's and killed them in at least 20 attacks leading up to 9/11 and getting braver all the time since we did nothing about it), our Military had to be rebuilt in areas to fill the holes Clinton left! That takes $'s. Well-spent $'s to equip our military to carry out the protection of American citizens as authorized by our Constitution!
Quote:
In addition, it isn't possible to cut enough spending to fill the deficit.
Yes it is...Ryan's house budget leads to that result...you know, the one sitting on the shelf in the Senate because Harry Reid will not let it come to the floor. The same Senate that is in violation of the requirement to bring forth and pass a budget every year?
Quote:
Given that, we can choose to tax millionaires or raise taxes on waitresses, cab drivers, school teachers, firemen and office workers. Since millionaires have gotten a rather good deal with the Bush tax-cuts, it's fair to tax them more than the others.
Third:
The Constitution says nothing about the free enterprise system. If it did, we wouldn't have a government run Post Office specifically mentioned in the Constitution.
Didn't say it did! I referred to the right to personal responsibility which the Constitution does address and which depends upon a good economy so that people can take responsibility for themselves. Reading comprehension, anyone?
Quote:
The bottom line is that while someone may blather free-market rhetoric, we are a far better nation with these programs than we were in the period of time that preceded them and we need to pay for a government.
We are a so "far better nation with these programs" that we will be bankrupt as a nation and ripe for takeover by the Socialist/Communistic oriented people who are driving us in this direction and then, let's just open the door to the radical terrorists that think everyone in the world should be under their rule or die! Yeah...good thinking there! Sure glad most people will never agree with that when they come to see the problems of such thinking and foolish political agendas supporting same.
I don't understand that how in a country that promotes "shooting for the moon", that somehow those that do shoot for the moon are penalized for those that choose to sit on their rumps and beg for government hand outs all day. and continue to have kids when they can't afford them. and drop out of school when they know they need to stay there. i don't get that. do you?
It's almost like saying "don't shoot for the mooon" .."shoot for mediocracy and the government will help with the rest"
Listen to this nonsense. Paying taxes is being "penalized" and because you are rich you must be working hard.
Bill Maher wrote a funny piece a while back. This is part of it:
Quote:
But I want to point you to an American who is truly suffering: Ben Stein. You know Ben Stein, the guy who got rich because when he talks it sounds so boring it's actually funny. He had a game show on Comedy Central, does eye drop commercials, doesn't believe in evolution? Yeah, that a$$hole. I kid Ben -- so, the other day Ben wrote an article about his struggle. His struggle as a wealthy person facing the prospect of a slightly higher marginal tax rate. Specifically, Ben said that when he was finished paying taxes and his agents, he was left with only 35 cents for every dollar he earned. Which is shocking, Ben Stein has an agent? I didn't know Broadway Danny Rose was still working.
Ben whines in his article about how he's worked for every dollar he has -- if by work you mean saying the word "Bueller" in a movie 25 years ago. Which doesn't bother me in the slightest, it's just that at a time when people in America are desperate and you're raking in the bucks promoting some sleazy Free Credit Score dot-com... maybe you shouldn't be asking us for sympathy. Instead, you should be down on your knees thanking God and/or Ronald Reagan that you were lucky enough to be born in a country where a useless s chmuck who contributes absolutely nothing to society can somehow manage to find himself in the top marginal tax bracket.
Ok, rich people don't want to contribute any more taxes. The result is already happening, the nation is dis-investing in education -- you know, the system that created all those engineers that got us to the moon, invented computer chips and provide business owners with educated people to continue making money for those rich people?
here's a simple math equation for anybody that thinks Obama's tax on the millionaires is worth a flip:
tax the millionaires and the millionaires cut jobs. then you have no job growth at all. simple math
the taxes are then sent to lowest income slackers aka the bums who don't wanna work anyway
that's Obama's job's bill in a nut shell. not one valid sustainable job will be created, just temp work to glaze over the fact that there will be no jobs created.
but the Obama pep rallies continue on into 2012.
What a load. Taxes are levied on profits, and labor is an expenditure. Nobody hires a job because they have extra money, nor do they cut one because they have none. Labor depends on demand. If you have high enough demand, you hire another worker. If you have no demand (essentially what we have now), you lay off workers.
This is a great idea! I know a lot of moderates who think $250,000 is too low of an income to increase taxes. However, I think any reasonable person would agree to increasing taxes on people who make $1 million or more per year. I doubt Republicans will be okay with this, but I'm sure the majority of independents will support this idea.
Do you support it and why?
---
This should be on major media websites soon. It's a breaking alert sent from CNBC to my phone.
There's something not right here. Either there's something we don't know here or those "rich people" are incredibly stupid.
And don't give me that "they want to help humanity". All they have to do is contribute to a charity to give those in need directly. This will go a lot longer than giving it to Obama and some fat *** gov't employee to stamp forms all day long.
You cannot possibly be that gullible to think Obama got to where he was without support from lots of rich, well connected people. And they aren't going to support Obama without expecting something in return. For God sakes read the f'ing paper sometime to see the continuous parade of scandals to see what I mean.
There's something not right here. Either there's something we don't know here or those "rich people" are incredibly stupid.
And don't give me that "they want to help humanity". All they have to do is contribute to a charity to give those in need directly. This will go a lot longer than giving it to Obama and some fat *** gov't employee to stamp forms all day long.
You cannot possibly be that gullible to think Obama got to where he was without support from lots of rich, well connected people. And they aren't going to support Obama without expecting something in return. For God sakes read the f'ing paper sometime to see the continuous parade of scandals to see what I mean.
Because in Obama's money laundering administration, if you donate to his campaign, you get the money back that he's stolen from the wealthy. So only non-Obama supporters will lose out. Solyndra is a prime example of Pay to Play.
This is a great idea! I know a lot of moderates who think $250,000 is too low of an income to increase taxes. However, I think any reasonable person would agree to increasing taxes on people who make $1 million or more per year. I doubt Republicans will be okay with this, but I'm sure the majority of independents will support this idea.
Do you support it and why?
---
This should be on major media websites soon. It's a breaking alert sent from CNBC to my phone.
These people already pay a much higher income tax rate, why the class envy? These people are already paying close to a combined state, federal, county and local tax of 50% tax, if not over 50%.
Meanwhile, 40% or more of Americans pay no federal income tax at all, and many of them even get back more in their tax refund then they paid in.
Follow-up news flash - Millionaires board "buffet plane" and move their "buffet butts" off shore. Film at 11..idiots
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As an Employer, speaking to you, an employee, you have no clue about how money works. 
do you?
